Goodbye to March, a funny month

All these pictures were taken here in March, mostly this year (I think one is from last year). March here tends to be snowy, cold, and if it gets a little warm it gets very muddy. This year it was so cold for so long that nothing (except a very few snowdrops) grew at all. Pretty depressing, overall.

A few happy points: Last year it got warm and then we had an ice storm, which froze a lot of tree blossoms and hurt some crops. This year, the month seemed more consistent, which I think means fewer frozen blossoms. Also, the birds did come back, as you can see on the fence picture.

Decorating inside during March was weird--I put out the tulip and Easter stuff, as Easter was Mar 23, but there are no tulip shoots, much less tulip blooms. Ah well, at least we get to enjoy the decorations longer.

Guacamole

Guacamole
from Jane Brody’s Good Food Book
1 ¼ cups (4-6 servings)
15 minutes to make

1 large ripe avocado
1 ½ T fresh lime juice
¼ c minced onion
1 small tomato, seeded, finely chopped
1 T minced fresh jalapeno
1 clove garlic, finely minced
¼ t salt (opt)

1. Halve avocado lengthwise around pit. Scoop out flesh into small bowl.
2. Add the lime juice and mash with fork.
3. Stir in the rest of the ingredients.

Nutritional info: 86 calories (not including chips!)

You can substitute lemon juice for the lime juice and a bit of crushed red pepper flakes for the jalapeno.
If you make this ahead, place the avocado pit in the guacamole, place saran wrap touching the guacamole’s surface, and place it in the fridge. These actions will help it keep better, but it will brown. Serve at room temperature.

I decided to post this recipe today because it's snowing quite hard here. In protest I recommend summery foods like chips and guacamole.

Peter Abelard

This week I was reading some Peter Abelard. For those of you who are not up on your medieval philosopher/theologians, he lived in the 12th century and was an incredibly smart guy, probably a little too smart for his own good. His story has fascinated many people over the centuries. He was a very gifted debater. It seems that in his early 20's he bested one of the top theologians of the day in a disputation and decided to start teaching himself, drawing a large number of students through his charisma and brilliance. His successes continued until romance intervened. He fell in love with (or seduced, depending on how you want to look at it) a woman named Heloise, the daughter of a nobleman- he was supposed to be her tutor. She ended up pregnant, but Abelard didn't want to marry her because as a theologian being married would have harmed his career. (His relationship with her was already widely known, so it is interesting what facts about a person would damage a career...) Finally they decided on a secret marriage, but her father was still not pleased and ordered some goons to seize Abelard in the middle of the night and perform some involuntary surgery on him to make sure his sin would not be repeated (let the reader understand). Both Abelard and Heloise then entered monasteries.

Given that back story, it was interesting to read Abelard's account of the nature of sin. He rejects the idea that to sin is simply to have an evil desire. Instead, he says that sin involves consent to evil. Abelard argues that we constantly have a battle of good and evil impulses inside of us, and that sin comes when we consent to the evil, committing ourselves to act on it if we get the chance. If I understand him right, some forms of "acting" might be mental, such as lust- an example he uses frequently. One gets the sense of a man vividly remembering his own battles with sin and trying to make sense of them. He seems to have been repentant in the end and regarded his mutilation as a just punishment for his own sin.

From that basis, he then argues that actually acting out the sin doesn't actually add to the wrongness once one has really committed oneself to the evil act. God sees the heart, and from God's perspective there is no different in heart between one who tries to do evil and fails to carry it out for reasons beyond his control and another who succeeds in carrying it out. What I found interesting about this was first the question of whether trying to change what we desire is part of righteousness, or if it is simply not giving in to the evil desires we have. Second, it seems to me an interesting precursor to contemporary philosophical debates about "moral luck." Two people have the same motive and may even perform the same action, but one is unlucky and things turn out badly. Is it right to judge that person more harshly? In Anselm's view, luck is beside the point because external events don't accurately reveal the heart, and God is able to see the heart perfectly.

Christian Fiction, Part I

Christian fiction has often been accused of being formulaic, pedantic, predictable, unrealistic, and often not very Christian or very good fiction.

For many authors and titles, I agree with this assessment.

However, many genres (romance, mystery, etc.) could also easily be accused of being formulaic and unrealistic. This does not prevent them from being fun to read.

So, a definition: Truly good Christian fiction is not overtly preachy; the truths of Christianity are woven through the story. The plot tells an interesting story and the characters are complex. And you can't tell who the main character is going to marry just by reading the first chapter.

As I post reviews, I'll let you know whether a book is truly good Christian fiction, or whether it's just a quick, fun Sunday afternoon read.

If you want to get started on some truly great Christian fiction, check out Francine Rivers' novels. "The Mark of the Lion" trilogy is amazing historical fiction, and And the Shofar Blew is incredibly compelling modern-day fiction.
http://www.francinerivers.com/books.asp

Let me know what you think.